Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
If the suggested method has the same functionality as firstNonNull, it should
have
the same name:
public static <T> T firstNonNull(@Nullable T first, @Nullable T second, T...
others)
The question is whether that method would be used often enough to justify
adding it
to the library.
Original comment by jared.l....@gmail.com
on 12 Jun 2008 at 4:27
There's two separate issues here.
One is whether "pick" or "firstNonNull" is the better name for this/these
methods.
Personally, I like "pick", and would be okay with us changing that.
The second is whether to support varargs. In truth, we are undergoing an
exercise to
try to BANISH varargs from our API as much as we can. They're great in theory,
but
in practice they're a near-disaster. I don't think there would be enough
demand for
this method you describe anyway; if there is, we could address 80% of that
demand by
adding a three-arg overload and leave it at that.
It's too bad about varargs.
Original comment by kevin...@gmail.com
on 12 Jun 2008 at 4:36
Our consensus is that the name "firstNonNull" makes up for its verbosity by
being
clear and self-explanatory, while "pick" is slightly vulnerable to confusion.
Combined with my earlier statements about varargs, I'm considering this issue a
won't-fix.
Thanks for your feedback; it is appreciated.
Original comment by kevin...@gmail.com
on 12 Jun 2008 at 6:16
Thanks for your quick reply!
About the name I agree with you.
However, saying varargs, I myself think this is a nice feature. I beliee a lot
of
other guys would have same opnion with me. Could you please give some hint,
such as a
url or description or examples, on it? I think it worth to be put in FAQ as
well.
Thanks
Jiming
Original comment by jiming...@gmail.com
on 13 Jun 2008 at 4:48
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
jiming...@gmail.com
on 12 Jun 2008 at 12:23